Fear is the root of All suffering

[Boy]

Can a being that mindfully transcends fear-rooted thought still have cause to arise the illusion of suffering? (Illusion because the natural state has awareness beyond the capacity to suffer.)

No.

[3bob]

that depends on what "mindfully" means with mind per-se being of duality, thus mind can not transcend its own duality which obviously means suffering because of duality.

[Bud Jetsun]

that depends on what "mindfully" means with mind per-se being of duality, thus mind can not transcend its own duality which obviously means suffering because of duality.

 

"Mindfully" is a series of symbols some identify as whatever they believe "letters" to be.  "Mindfully" is a typed representation of whatever the perceiver of those letters interprets it to mean based on some elaborate set of rules they have made in there minds what is believably "mindfull."

 

As "mindfully" is constructed of a series of human constructs that don't get realer just because they are combined, nor can a sentence get 'realer' because it is chain of these interpretation based construct delusions. 

 

For these reasons, it is not possible to convey the experience no matter how long I sit typing with intent to aid your liberation from suffering, I can still not escape any combinations of letters I type resulting in more than an arrangement of individual's subjective interpretation delusions appearing in your mind. 

 

Despite inherent futility of the effort, in compassion it is still worth making the attempt. 

 

Mindfullness expressed in constructs, looks like peeling back the illusion that it has ever been anyone but yourself handling every thought and whim and qwirk.  Once you realize this, it is simply a matter of training yourself not to slip back into the illusion.  This is not nearly as difficult as some make it to be, if you realize that to not is to suffer and/or cause suffering without purpose.

 

Whatever that pattern of illuminated pixels representing some delusion constructs means as interpreted by your personal consciousness is up to you. 

 

The great ironic logical fallacy of trusting in logic to represent your concept of reality is in missing that logic is a set of rules for a game played using arrangements of interpretation-delusion constructs as game-pieces.  

 

What gives rise to the ability to choose to play the delusion-construct based games is inherently beyond the delusion based games. 

 

Again, this is my choice to futilely play within the confines of a word game to de-construct the illusion the word game was either reality or ever capable of being a faithful representation of reality.  

 

Intellectually it's an easy trap to logically rationalize the replacement of perception of reality with beautifully composed arrangements of construct-delusions that do not analog to any aspect of reality beyond whatever someone believes that construct delusion arrangement meets there constructed set of rules of the logic-game and whatever that means to them. 

 

With Unlimited Love,

-Bud

[Bud Jetsun]

For any arrangement of words to mean the same thing to two people, they would need to be the same consciousness. This makes the bounds of connotation inherently defined by the limitations of the perceiver's interpretational construct delusion of what some series of keystrokes means. 

 

This is why no matter how many books you read, and however far you follow the path of the logic tree, one does not shed living in delusions until transcending that which is word-construct describable and begin choosing to perceive the ineffable Now. 

 

For this reason, one may not 'brute-force-attack' with logic into enlightenment. Letting go of the word-thought delusion construct series is what some call surender.  

 

With Unlimited Love,

-Bud

Edited August 14, 2015 by Bud Jetsun

[Nikolai1]

Two awesome posts Bud Jetsun - thank you!

[Karl]

For any arrangement of words to mean the same thing to two people, they would need to be the same consciousness. This makes the bounds of connotation inherently defined by the limitations of the perceiver's interpretational construct delusion of what some series of keystrokes means. 

 

This is why no matter how many books you read, and however far you follow the path of the logic tree, one does not shed living in delusions until transcending that which is word-construct describable and begin choosing to perceive the ineffable Now. 

 

For this reason, one may not 'brute-force-attack' with logic into enlightenment. Letting go of the word-thought delusion construct series is what some call surender.  

 

With Unlimited Love,

-Bud

 

This is because you do not have clear definitions for things. Logical reasoning is the only option for correctly integrating concepts dragged from the universe. However, integrated concepts are only as good as the definitions they are based upon. If the definitions are poor, then the entire concept will remain floating. It is a house built on sand. The more poor definitions and floating concepts are held, the greater the error becomes. This is why mysticism becomes more attractive. If key concepts are floating then why trust any concepts at all ? The delusion is due to inherent sloppiness in building the concepts. It is like feeding your consciousness with junk food then sitting on the sofa and watching TV for hours at a time. Eventually the consciousness becomes the junk it is fed with and then responsibility turns to blame and a requirement for miracle cures.

 

Man is a spiritual creature with free will and emotion. He is suited to living in groups and functioning cooperatively in order to realise his own desires and those of his fellow men. Logic is only one half of us. It is a tool for knowing reality nothing more. It is a tool of learning. It keeps us ploughing straight and true. The more things we can know, the greater becomes the requirement for ensuring that what is stored away isn't rubbish. Subjective feelings lack any accuracy and have resulted in some of the worst crimes and cataclysms man has embarked upon, what's more it has allowed the base man, the coward, the corrupt, the manipulator, the psychopathic to become rulers. These people know the value of fear as a tool for control and they know that reason lessens its effects. Hiding behind subjective mysticism might make you feel better, but it doesn't alter what is happening in the world. Pulling a sheet over the head might hide the world from you, but it won't stop a bullet.

 

[3bob]

Bud, were all of the "you"s you used generic in nature? If not please be more "mindful" the next time,

since all the convoluted and condescending projections are obviously dubious.  

 

Thus I suggest getting off that holier than thou variation and just spit it out, is mind dualistic or not by your definition?

Edited August 14, 2015 by 3bob

[Nikolai1]

... is mind dualistic or not by your definition?

The question presupposes a discrete entity called mind. This is therefore a question in the dualistic mode and the only meaningful response is in the same mode. This can either be:

 

1) Yes, IT is.

 

2) no, IT isn't.

 

And because we have answered in dualistic mode, our answer is open to dualistic agreement or diagreement.

 

One way round this, would be stay silent to such an answer, which I didn't do, but perhaps Bud Jetsun will!

[allinone]

If you mindfully conclude choosing to fear, by default you greet all you perceive with Love, as that is the only alternative root of thought for humans. 

 

If you are choosing to Love all you perceive, suffering is impossible. 

 

A humans past is nothing more than some ever evolving delusions of imagination filtered through human perception limitations and processed by delusions of judgement and categorizing in the mind that is no more real than they choose to make it through choosing to believe the illusion.  

 

If you recognize all that is real is the perception of this moment of Now, how can anything else effect you outside of yourself consciously choosing to suffer out of ignorance?

 

With Unlimited Love,

-Bud

 

What if your object of love starts to suffer. Basically you will also need to love people who causes suffering for the ones you love and you watching it lovingly and love also yourself while doing it.

 

desire realm, form realm, formless realm all suffering..

Edited August 14, 2015 by allinone

[Nikolai1]

Hi Karl,

 

This is because you do not have clear definitions for things. Logical reasoning is the only option for correctly integrating concepts dragged from the universe. However, integrated concepts are only as good as the definitions they are based upon. If the definitions are poor, then the entire concept will remain floating.

Just out of interest, could you give an example of a clear definition of a concept or thing? Something that passes your own test of a good definition?

[allinone]

For now i disagree that fear is root of all suffering.

 

i think what could help me is that knowing there is absolutely no possibility to help better my situation, but so far greed has entered to me before i can enjoy that moment of nothingness where greed and desire to move on is gone.

[Karl]

Hi Karl,

 

 

Just out of interest, could you give an example of a clear definition of a concept or thing? Something that passes your own test of a good definition?

 

Man is a rational animal.

 

 

[Nikolai1]

Man is a rational animal.

You have nothing to teach him then!

[Karl]

You have nothing to teach him then!

 

That man possesses the faculty of reason does not mean he cannot misuse it. Man is not omniscient, he must learn to learn. Then he must also experience the world and the result of his actions. We are learning machines, but the old adage applies-RiRo. The clearer the reasoning the better the thoughts and actions will be.

 

All communication is a trade in thoughts. The more defined the object of those thoughts, the easier will be the trade. Definitions can always be improved with new information and concepts can be integrated to form new learnings. If all the definitions are purely a feeling, then we have left reasoning behind and the words that describe concepts will appear as mere sounds backed by a mental fog.

 

"I've done the math enough to know the dangers of our second guessing, due to crumble unless we grow and strengthen our communication". To quote the lyrics of a song.

 

Learn and grow wiser.

 

 

 

[Nikolai1]

If we pursue this then it will derail this thread. I'll start a new one OK?

[Spotless]

The root of all "suffering" is the illusion of time and space.

 

From these all grasping and the habit of anxiousness begins.

Edited August 14, 2015 by Spotless

[Karl]

If we pursue this then it will derail this thread. I'll start a new one OK?

 

Yes, you had better keep me on track as I have a habit of just going with the flow :-)

[Karl]

The root of all "suffering" is the illusion of time and space.

From these all grasping and the habit of anxiousness begins.

 

What kind of time ? You mean as we measure it, or as a universal arrow pointing forward ?

Space as in the stuff we point to in which stars and planets appear to hang, or the generality of the universe in totality ?

 

Is it anxiousness or just unease with a particular situation and isn't that just the root of all action. I mean when the belly signals a need for food then it's time to eat. Eating means moving in space and time.

[dwai]

The question presupposes a discrete entity called mind. This is therefore a question in the dualistic mode and the only meaningful response is in the same mode. This can either be:

 

1) Yes, IT is.

 

2) no, IT isn't.

 

And because we have answered in dualistic mode, our answer is open to dualistic agreement or diagreement.

 

One way round this, would be stay silent to such an answer, which I didn't do, but perhaps Bud Jetsun will!

If there's a subject and an object, then it is dualistic.  If that is what you call mind (I do), then it is. It cannot be non-dualistic. 

[dwai]

The root of all "suffering" is the illusion of time and space.

 

From these all grasping and the habit of anxiousness begins.

Why are time and space illusory? Do you not move and breath in space? Does your body not age with time?

 

Edited August 14, 2015 by dwai

[Marblehead]

 

One way round this, would be stay silent to such an answer, which I didn't do, ...

Hehehe.  I have that same problem.  Silence is so quiet.  Someone needs say something.

[Marblehead]

Man is a rational animal.

You haven't known many men, have you?

[Marblehead]

The root of all "suffering" is the illusion of time and space.

 

From these all grasping and the habit of anxiousness begins.

I still need a "No Thank You" button.

[Karl]

You haven't known many men, have you?

 

Few who use reason well that is true, but then neither did I. In the land of the blind, the one eyed man is King.

[Marblehead]

But then, in the Land of Points, the Pointless One was banished.